- Empowering Spirits Foundation, March 4, 2010

Couples waited in line for hours Wednesday to apply for marriage licenses on the first day same-sex unions became legal in the nation’s capital.

Cheering erupted from the crowd when the first couple signed in at the city’s marriage bureau inside the Moultrie courthouse, just blocks from the U.S. Capitol. By the afternoon, more than 100 couples had come to the bureau, and more than 50 had completed their applications. The rest stood in line in the courthouse corridor, checking e-mail, reading newspapers and exchanging stories with other couples.

Because of a mandatory waiting period of three business days, couples won’t be able to marry in the District of Columbia until Tuesday. But the mood Wednesday was still celebratory. Couples got cupcakes from a city councilman who sponsored the gay marriage law, and throughout the morning, people applauded as they exited the marriage bureau with their applications complete.

Sinjoyla Townsend, 41, and her partner of 12 years, Angelisa Young, 47, claimed the first spot in line just after 6 a.m. They are already domestic partners in the city but wanted to become legally married.

“It’s like waking up Christmas morning,” said Young, who teared up when she sat down to process their paperwork. “It’s really like a dream come true.”

Most couples applying for licenses were from the district and nearby Maryland and Virginia, but one couple had gotten on the road at 4 a.m. to drive from West Virginia. Many said they had already had marriage ceremonies — some years ago — but wanted marriage certificates. And they said they attached special importance to being at the courthouse on the first day.

“This shows that there’s a buildup, waiting for this to happen,” said Christopher Grieder, 46, of Herndon, Va., who has been with Stuart Kopperman, 53, for 14 years and is planning an April 3 wedding.

Others said they felt an urgency to get married while they can. Eva Townsend and Shana McDavis-Conway had a wedding in St. Croix in 2008 and are registered domestic partners.

But McDavis-Conway is from California, where same-sex marriages were legal for a time before voters decided to ban them. She said she wanted to get married now in Washington in case something similar happens there.

Townsend and McDavis-Conway planned to go in late to work, though other people in line said they had taken the day off. Couples spent the time talking to their neighbors in line and relating their love stories. One couple met online on a Star Trek fan film site, another dancing at a country and western bar.

Emma White, 30, and Stephanie White, 40, met volunteering on Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign and had a wedding ceremony in 2006. Emma is pregnant with a baby due in April. The couple — No. 58 in line — said they wouldn’t do another big wedding because they had already been married.

Stephanie White said the government was “just “catching up” to what had already happened, though it makes her feel “a little more secure” to have a marriage license.

Washington is the sixth place in the nation where gay marriages can take place. Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont also issue licenses to same-sex couples.

To prepare for Wednesday, the marriage bureau changed its license applications so they are gender-neutral, asking for the name of each “spouse” rather than the “bride” and “groom.” The bureau also brought in temporary employees to help its regular staff.

“Everybody who wants a marriage license is going to get one. It may take a little longer, but they will get their license,” courthouse spokeswoman Leah Gurowitz said.

Normally, the bureau handles just 10 applications a day. Two heterosexual couples did show up Wednesday morning. Matt Lawson, 30, and Christine Vander Molen, 27, said they learned last night that they could expect a crowd at the marriage bureau on the historic day. But they are getting married next weekend and couldn’t wait any longer to apply for a license. Vander Molen said she didn’t mind being the “odd couple out” and found it funny when one person looked at them quizzically and asked, “You two are getting married to each other?”

The gay marriage law was introduced in the 13-member D.C. Council in October and had near-unanimous support from the beginning. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty signed it in December, but because Washington is a federal district, the law had to undergo a congressional review period that expired March 2.

Opponents, however, are still attempting to overturn the bill in court. That worries Eric North and Tom French, both 45, who were waiting in line Wednesday at the courthouse.

“We want to get in when we can,” French said.

“I want to be able to say I’m married,” North added.

- Daily Kos

From all reports, potential Senate candidate Harold Ford Jr. faced a tough crowd tonight as he spoke to the Stonewall Democrats at the New York Lesbian, Gay and Transgender Community Center: “They said they don’t trust him and shouted that he is ‘anti-gay.’ Ford said all he can do is explain he was wrong in the past and has changed his mind.”

- By Ruth Schneider, 365gay.com
03.02.2010

The Nevada Taxi Authority is under fire for a policy that groups gays with alleged criminals among those at high risk of giving communicable diseases to agency employees.

“The policy of the Taxicab Authority is to safeguard, to the highest degree possible, employees and the public who come in contact with people who have or are suspected of having communicable disease without sacrificing essential services to the community or individual citizens,” the policy reads.

Who else, besides the gays, poses a risk of transmitting communicable diseases? Sex workers and intravenous drug users.

The policy goes to great length to explain how “persons of high-risk groups, including homosexuals, intravenous drug users, prostitutes and others are to be treated with caution. Where violence or an altercation is likely, when practical, protective disposable gloves and an eye and face shield should be worn.”

Former TA Officer Scott Lewis told Las Vegas’ CBS 8 the policy shocked him.

“It took my breath away to read that. It lumps in homosexuals and gays with drug users and prostitutes. Drug users and prostitutes as we know are criminals,” he said. “My question is, what is a homosexual? How can you tell? Would you ask them, ‘Are you homosexual?’ and then stop, as it says, for your personal protective equipment.”

- SDGLN Staff | Tue, 03/02/2010

DAVIS – The UC Davis community is in an uproar this week after homophobic slurs were spray-painted on the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Resource Center building on campus.

The vandalism was discovered Saturday morning. It was the second hate crime reported on campus in the past week. A Jewish student at UC Davis reported to authorities late last week that someone carved a swastika on her dorm room door.

The FBI has joined local authorities in investigating the hate crimes.

Students reacted immediately to the homophobic slurs, covering up the graffiti with handwritten notes expressing love and support. Hundreds of students rallied on campus on Monday, marched with signs and banners, and later that night packed a town hall meeting called by the university.

UC Davis officials reassured the town hall gathering that the university was vigilant and taking steps to curb the problem.

Town hall participants recommended adding diversity classes, beefing up funding for diversity programs and documenting all hate crimes.

By Michelle Boorstein
The Washington Post, March 2, 2010

In case you missed our front page today, the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington announced yesterday that it would stop giving spousal health benefits to future employees as a result of the District’s new same-sex marriage law. The law forbids contractors of the city – such as the church’s social service arm, Catholic Charities – from discriminating against same-sex married couples, and the church says it cannot do anything that will be seen as recognizing same-sex couples as married.
Needless to say, it’s fascinating to watch the church weigh on one hand the giving of health care — one of its most fervently-sought social justice goals – and on the other the issue of recognizing (even unwillingly) same-sex marriages as “marriages.”
We’re very interested in the impact on Catholic Charities’ employees, present and future. If you are one, or know one, we’d love to hear your point of view. Please get in touch with me at boor...@washpost.com

Original Article By Rachel Larris, RH Reality Check
March 1, 2010

Those trial watchers who were following California’s trial of Prop 8, otherwise known as the “gay marriage trial,” got a peek at what the closing arguments might sound like when the trial resumes. On Friday the two sides filed extensive briefs.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports:

“Californians voted for Proposition 8 because they thought it would strengthen the institution of marriage (and) … because they thought it would benefit children,” sponsors of Prop. 8 said Friday night in papers filed in federal court in San Francisco.

Their opponents, representing two same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco, said those purported goals of Prop. 8 were contradicted by overwhelming evidence at a 12-day trial in January that allowing same-sex couples to wed would benefit their children and the institution of marriage. Regardless of the intentions of individual voters, they argued, the Prop. 8 campaign was designed to appeal to fear and deep-seated prejudice.

“The evidence demonstrates that Proposition 8’s actual motivation was moral disapproval of gay and lesbian individuals,” said the measure’s opponents, plaintiffs in the federal court case. They said the ballot measure “sends a message to gay and lesbian individuals that they are not welcome in California.”

However the Chronicle noted that briefs reflect the “imbalance of evidence” presented during the trial by the defenders of Prop 8.

Protect Marriage withdrew four of its six scheduled witnesses at the start of the trial – saying they feared television coverage, which the Supreme Court had blocked – and presented two witnesses, political science Professor Kenneth Miller and the president of the Institute for American Values, David Blankenhorn.

The Prop. 8 sponsors cited research works, but no witness testimony, for one of their central assertions Friday: that “extending marriage to same-sex couples would result in a profound change to the definition, structure, and public meaning of marriage.” Their opponents urged Walker to disregard such assertions, saying they contradict most academic studies and were never tested in court.

Citing Miller’s testimony, Prop. 8’s backers said gays and lesbians have strong political allies, particularly in California, and “have achieved the power they need to effectively pursue their goals through democratic institutions” without judicial intervention.

They cited Blankenhorn and the writings of conservative scholars for the conclusion that marriage is universally defined by “maleness and femaleness” and that one of its central purposes is “the encouragement of procreation under specific conditions” – a purpose best served, they argued, by limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

Despite the initial ban on cameras during the first phase of the trial, cameras may be allowed during the closing arguments. According to the San Francisco Chronicle:

Despite a rebuff from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Bay Area’s federal judges are again proposing to allow cameras in their courtrooms, a plan that could lead to telecasting of closing arguments in a suit challenging California’s ban on same-sex marriage.

The U.S. District Court in San Francisco has posted a rule change on its Web site that would allow its judges to take part in a pilot program of airing selected nonjury civil trials.

The proposal is the same one Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker adopted in January after a week of overwhelmingly favorable public comment.

In Other News: While Maryland’s Attorney General’s move for the state to recognize gay marriages performed out-of-state is hotly debated, one state senator is trying to use it to lure defense contractor Northrop Grumman to Maryland for their new corporate headquarters. His reason: Virginia is not as gay-friendly as Maryland, a factor Northup Grumman should respect. The Washington Post reports:

In a letter sent Thursday to the company’s CEO, Maryland State Sen. Richard S. Madaleno Jr. (D-Montgomery) argued his state’s stand on gay rights better mirrors the company’s own longstanding commitment to gay and lesbian employees.

“Here in Maryland, we value our gay and lesbian citizens as part of a diverse population that makes the state strong,” Madaleno wrote. “Virginia is doing the opposite and letting its LGBT citizens — and those considering whether to move and work there — know that they and their families are unwelcome second-class citizens. And they are counting on corporations like yours not to care.”

The Los Angeles-based company is currently deciding between Virginia, Maryland and the District as a new home for its 300 top executives, running an unusually public contest among the three.

Original Article at LGBTPOV.com
March 1, 2010

Openly gay Assemblymember John Perez (D-Los Angeles) is making history Monday as he is sworn in as the new Assembly Speaker. He is taking over from Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles), who is running for Congressmember Diane Watson’s seat.

Longtime political columnist Rick Orlov notes that Assembly Speaker is considered “the second-most powerful job in California politics.” He writes:

“In a ceremony being compared to an inauguration, Perez will outline his priorities – jobs, jobs, jobs and perhaps a bit on education and, oh yeah, that multibillion-dollar budget problem. He is expected to be speaking to a full house, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, former Gov. Gray Davis and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa – Perez’s cousin.”

Also attending will be many of Perez’s longtime LGBT friends, including Eric Bauman, the openly gay vice chair of the California Democratic Party. Bauman emailed that “the Speaker-elect and members of the Legislature were blessed at a magnificent interfaith service that included Catholic priests, bishops, ministers and our community’s own Rabbi Denise Eger.” He adds, “An incredible diversity of Californians are in Sacramento to attend and participate in the swearing-in, including the Gay Men’s Chorus who I am sure will turn the house out when they sing.”

The Los Angeles Times looks at Perez’s ties to the labor movement and deep-pocket donors, writing: “The legislator, who has cultivated an image as a crusader for the marginalized and powerless, has also advocated for the powerful.” The Times reports that:

“In 2009, his first full year as a lawmaker, Pérez carved a lucrative exception into state law for billionaire developer Philip Anschutz. He also introduced a bill at the request of Enterprise Car Rental that would have helped boost the company’s bottom line by stripping away a significant consumer protection.

“Before his election to the Assembly, while a member of the Los Angeles redevelopment commission, Pérez voted to give millions in government subsidies to a giant real estate firm that contributed heavily to his union’s political fund.”

Juxtaposed to The Times in-depth piece is Perez’s conversation with me about how he brought clean water to a neglected area in his district, indicating his “cultivated” image as a crusader for the powerless has some substance to it.

Equality California Executive Director Geoff Kors issued the following statement:

“Equality California is thrilled to welcome Assemblymember John A. Pérez as Speaker of the Assembly. With his indispensible leadership and stellar track record, we have the utmost confidence in his ability to find solutions to the many challenges California faces.

“California is a true trail blazer with respect to reflecting the state’s diversity in our leadership, as we witnessed in the ground breaking election of the first female African-American Speaker two years ago and now the first LGBT Speaker.

“Speaker Pérez is a role model and an inspiration to the LGBT community, especially to LGBT youth struggling to find acceptance at home and in school. We wish him the very best of luck as he embarks on this momentous journey and look forward to continuing our partnership with him in our mission to achieve full equality for LGBT Californians.”

Original Story from AFP
March 1, 2010

KAMPALA — Hundreds of anti-AIDS campaigners on Monday urged Ugandan lawmakers to reject a proposed anti-gay law calling for tough penalties against homosexuality, including the death penalty.

Around 400 activists presented parliament speaker Edward Ssekandi with a petition, criticising the bill as a violation of Uganda’s constitution.

“The bill is not about protecting Ugandan culture and traditions as it purports. On the contrary it is violating our cultures, traditions and religious values that teach against intolerance, injustice, hatred and violence,” one of the activists, Reverend Canon Gideon Byamugisha, said.

“The bill threatens all of us. It threatens the health, peace and the well-being of Ugandan citizens and goes against the Ugandan constitution which provides for freedom from discrimination on the grounds of sex, race, colour, ethnicity, tribe, birth and creed,” another activist, Rubaramira Ruranga, told AFP.

But the parliament speaker said the bill had to undergo the due process.

“At the moment we cannot block the bill; it has to follow the procedure in the house,” Ssekandi told the group.

“As part of this procedure we welcome people with divergent views to submit them so that we take into account these concerns,” he added.

The bill, which has sparked widespread international condemnation, would criminalise public discussion of homosexuality and could penalise an individual who knowingly rents property to a homosexual.

It also calls for the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality”, in cases of rape of a minor by a person of the same sex, or where one partner carries the virus that can cause AIDS.

Homosexuality is already illegal in Uganda, punishable by life imprisonment in some instances.

Copyright © 2010 AFP. All rights reserved

via PR Newswire.
Original story at the Memphis Business Journal

Feb 26, 2010

The largest gay wedding in history is scheduled for Saturday, March 20th in Washington, DC. Up to 400 couples will exchange vows breaking the current Guinness World Record. The celebration is part of an all-day series of events called Our Time Has Come, a title chosen to signify the long road that many couples have traveled to marriage. Events slated for March 20 include a large group ceremony, individual private ceremonies and a gala-style reception. All portions are scheduled at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium, an ornately gilded historic venue on Constitution Avenue, the event is being hosted by GLBT Wedding Services.

Mike Wilkinson, Director of Wedding Services for Event Emissary, is one of the planners producing the mega-event. “The LGBT community has always found strength in numbers when it comes to advocating for equality,” Wilkinson said. “Now we can finally stand together to affirm our love and have it recognized legally by the District of Columbia.”

Even though the event is big, the concept is being carefully designed so that the experience is special for every couple involved. The reception is open to friends and family to celebrate alongside the newlyweds. “Every aspect is being planned with sensitivity to the LGBT audience that will be attending,” Wilkinson said.

Drew Parker and his partner Dalin Holyoak are one of the many couples getting married at the event. “Our relationship and our lives could not wait for our marriage to be ‘legal’ in DC, but we are both excited and relieved that our marriage will finally be recognized in the city we call home. We signed up to be part of the mass ceremony as soon as we could.”

The centerpiece of the festivities will be the group ceremony titled Standing Proud Together. The non-denominational, contemporary service will be led in a manner that will solidify the unions of long-term partners as well as to commemorate the marriages of those who are more recently engaged. A limited number of smaller private ceremonies are also available.

A reception will follow in the evening after the ceremonies. Newlyweds are encouraged to invite friends and family to take part in celebration with music, a buffet, premium open bar and various types of wedding cakes.

“We celebrated our personal vows nearly two years ago, but we know the importance of this day to our status as fully equal citizens of the District of Columbia,” Parker said. “We are so thankful for the people that sacrificed to make this day a reality, and can only hope that one day the entire nation will follow.”

The entire event is contingent on the legalization of same-sex marriage, which is expected early next week . The organizers are working with Destination DC, the official convention and tourism corporation for the District, to help out-of-town couples with travel arrangements.

Once the law is official, couples can then apply for their marriage licenses. There is usually a three-day waiting period, but due to high volume, it may take longer. Wilkinson said that his team will work with couples to make sure they receive their licenses on time. “We’re not going to do anything if it’s not official. We’ve waited too long for that.”

- Empowering Spirits Foundation Feb 26th, 2010

Gays and lesbians should be allowed to adopt, but not marry. Illegal immigration is a huge problem, but immigrant children shouldn’t be punished for the sins of their parents. And California is a mess, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to fail.

In her first major interview since kicking her campaign into high gear, Meg Whitman, the front-runner for the Republican gubernatorial nomination, revealed her views on issues ranging from the “right to carry” movement to offshore oil drilling, Sarah Palin, the state budget and education reform.

Whitman, the former eBay chief, has been under attack by Democrats and her Republican rival, state Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, for avoiding debates and California political reporters and for not being specific enough on issues.

But in a fast-paced, 40-minute interview with the Mercury News, Whitman said she’s trying to “be as accessible as I can be” while giving political stump speeches around the state.

And she was far more polished than she appeared in a February 2009 interview with the Los Angeles Times, during which the political novice often seemed unschooled in the issues of the day — such as school vouchers, a key Republican issue.

In Wednesday night’s interview, conducted after a speech to a Republican group in Walnut Creek, Whitman came across as a quick study — politically savvy and surprisingly comfortable in her own political skin. After months of speculation about just where she falls on the ideological spectrum, she described herself as an “extraordinary fiscal conservative” who is “moderate to conservative” on social issues.

Much of her opponents’ criticism against her has focused on how she would close the state’s $20 billion budget deficit — a gap so huge that Intelligence Squared, a British organization that holds debates around the world, recently declared California America’s “first failed state.”

Whitman has called for the elimination of 40,000 state jobs, which would bring the number of jobs in California government to the same level as five years ago. She says the reduction could be done through attrition over her first four-year term.

But skeptics have pointed out that axing those jobs would save only $3.3 billion, leaving more than $16 billion to go.

Pressed for details on where else she would cut, Whitman said the state could also save enormous sums by reducing the pensions of new employees; cutting fraud in social programs such as Medi- Cal, welfare and In-Home Supportive Services; and updating computer systems to reduce fraud and increase efficiency.

“I want to go after the bureaucracy,” she said, adding that she will do a top-down review of the growth of programs and their effectiveness. “We have to do more with less,” she said. “And the only way to do that is through technology.”

No doubt, her political opponents — and voters — will demand more detailed answers and harder numbers during the campaign. Many fiscal experts say politicians shouldn’t be allowed to get away with saying they’ll solve enormous budget problems simply by reducing “waste, fraud and abuse.”

Jean Ross, executive director of the California Budget Project, a left-leaning think tank, said Thursday that Whitman is in for a few surprises if she becomes the next governor.

“Been there, done that,” she said. “Generalities don’t balance the budget.”

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, she said, made many of the same suggestions when he was running in the 2003 election that recalled Gov. Gray Davis. Most of the “low-hanging fruit” has already been cut, Ross said.

Whitman, however, insisted she’ll do better.

“I have a lot of respect for Arnold Schwarzenegger,” she said. “He’s done a number of very good things,” such as reforming workers’ compensation and the way legislative districts are drawn.

“But I think he has not done as much as he had hoped,” she said, in part because he had never run a large organization before taking office.

If elected, Whitman said, she would move to Sacramento — unlike Schwarzenegger —and get to know every senator and assembly member by name, letting them know what she “will and will not put up with.”

Whitman also said she would set a goal of adding 2 million private sector jobs in California during her first term, largely by creating a business-friendly atmosphere in which unnecessary regulations are jettisoned.

Asked to reconcile her stance against same-sex marriage with her willingness to allow gays and lesbians to adopt children, Whitman said she believes the term “marriage” should apply only to the union of a man and a woman. Still, she’s in favor of granting equal rights to gay people through civil unions and domestic partnerships.

And she approves letting gays adopt because “many kids need a great home.”

On illegal immigration, Whitman said she disagreed with her campaign chairman, former Gov. Pete Wilson, over Proposition 187, the 1994 initiative that was ruled unconstitutional.

She said it was wrong to write an initiative aimed “mostly at children” by denying them health services and an education. “The children did not come here on their own,” she said.

But she said the state has to draw the line when it comes to many other services. For example, she doesn’t believe illegal immigrants should — as is currently the law — be entitled to in-state tuition at California’s public colleges and universities.

Despite media reports that have painted the Golden State as a basket case, Whitman expressed confidence that California can be restored to fiscal health through Silicon Valley innovation and the state’s famed can-do spirit.

“Our destiny is more in our hands than most people believe,” she said.